Introducing the secret seekers and their eight-year quest
"If there's anything in reality that's not fun, we will change it."
Loading...hold tight!
Page
of 109 First / Last
darkmorgado wrote:Academic study is not reflective of real-world situations.
That's always been the problem with exams - they're not reflective of real-world situations. Coursework is far more reflective of general ability in a subject IMO - particularly for children with SEN, who won't function well in a traditional exam environment.
Coursework provides a good balance between theory knowledge and practical application of that knowledge.
Thanks for expressing interest in my signature!
Now with 80% more Cthulhu!
---------------------------------------------------------
AGP.SRPT
This post is unsuitable for those with a high rumour-sensitivity.
nickthegun wrote:True, but there is an imbalance between practical knowledge and stuff that will rarely be used.
Thats not really the point, is it? If we only learned things we used in day to day life, we would be a nation of thick bastards.
Now with 80% more Cthulhu!
This post is unsuitable for those with a high rumour-sensitivity.
darkmorgado wrote:Top down reform is necessary if you're going to maintain consistent standards. "Simply" reforming the curriculum has been tried and didn't work.nickthegun wrote:True, but there is an imbalance between practical knowledge and stuff that will rarely be used.
Thats not really the point, is it? If we only learned things we used in day to day life, we would be a nation of thick bastards.
But all of that could be addressed simply by overhauling the curriculum and the exam board system - there was no need for top-down reform. It just screams of "let's make a big change for the sake of it, so we can say we did something big"
Thanks for expressing interest in my signature!
Now with 80% more Cthulhu!
This post is unsuitable for those with a high rumour-sensitivity.
darkmorgado wrote:The news report says that is what will happen. So we're all happy, right?
@Chopsen
Which is why I said it should be done in conjunction with exam board reform
This post is unsuitable for those with a high rumour-sensitivity.
Chopsen wrote:By what standard is the curriculum currently "not working"? The changes aren't going to produce better educated students, they're just going to produce more clearly stratified students.darkmorgado wrote:Top down reform is necessary if you're going to maintain consistent standards. "Simply" reforming the curriculum has been tried and didn't work.nickthegun wrote:True, but there is an imbalance between practical knowledge and stuff that will rarely be used.
Thats not really the point, is it? If we only learned things we used in day to day life, we would be a nation of thick bastards.
But all of that could be addressed simply by overhauling the curriculum and the exam board system - there was no need for top-down reform. It just screams of "let's make a big change for the sake of it, so we can say we did something big"
Bremenacht wrote:No, because the new system will lead to the sidelining of people who don't all learn in the same way. We know there are different ways of learning now - kinesthetics, visual learning, etc etc. One size does not fit all if people learn in different ways. Combined with diminishing SEN support, an increase in free schools, etc etc, we're heading back to a country where opportunities are only given to the few instead of the many - and the grumbling over the current GCSE standard and all the bad-mouthing its getting could lead to students who qualified under the old system being devalued compared to people under the new one (just like last time).darkmorgado wrote:The news report says that is what will happen. So we're all happy, right?
@Chopsen
Which is why I said it should be done in conjunction with exam board reform
Now with 80% more Cthulhu!
Thanks for expressing interest in my signature!
darkmorgado wrote:So why pretend that it does, as does the GCSE?
One size does not fit all if people learn in different ways.
Thanks for expressing interest in my signature!
This post is sponsored by Apple and the iPhone 4S. Think different.
LB, you really are a massive geek.
LB, you really are a massive geek.
Thanks for expressing interest in my signature!
LB, you really are a massive geek.
LeoliansBro wrote:What discipline? The discipline to read something over and over again until it finally stays in for long enough to write it down on a bit of paper? I've been doing various exams outside of academia for years (professional stuff) and the most pointless ones are the ones you can just cram for.
And Psycho, it isn't the factual content that matters, it's the discipline.
This post is sponsored by Apple and the iPhone 4S. Think different.
Thanks for expressing interest in my signature!
Chopsen wrote:Not in any meaningful real world manner, no. Group projects on the other hand...
You can't test problem solving in an exam situation?
This post is sponsored by Apple and the iPhone 4S. Think different.
Psychotext wrote:I think this that is dependent on level that a subject is taught too. The way science was taught to me was as a list of dry facts. So yeah, no exam is going to much of anything there apart from testing recall.Chopsen wrote:Not in any meaningful real world manner, no. Group projects on the other hand...
You can't test problem solving in an exam situation?
Thanks for expressing interest in my signature!
LB, you really are a massive geek.
LB, you really are a massive geek.
Thanks for expressing interest in my signature!
Page
of 109 First / Last.gif)
